Yes, I would include Russia, although parts of eastern Russia/Siberia might be a little problematic since there have been many Chinese and "Eskimo"-type people there for basically thousands of years. Maybe just let those people stay but not let in more Chinese would be acceptible.

I agree.

Quote:

In the Western hemisphere and Aus/NZ, people already can and do "associate" with whomever they want. True, there are laws in most of those nations forbidding housing, employment and other kinds of discrimination based on race. Sorry, but I would prefer to keep it that way.

For what reason? Why is it "bad" to racially discriminate in a peaceful way?

Quote:

But look at it this way: If you wanted to strengthen the White-ness of European nations, what better way to do that than to "encourage" (in an admittedly negative way) the White people in the Americas/Aus/NZ to go to their ancestral homeland in Europe by not letting them form Whites-only enclaves in the Americas/Aus/NZ?

It wouldn't nescessarily encourage them to move to Europe, it might simply cause the white communities in non-european countries to slowly die out because they cannot remain separate.

Quote:

If Europe was guaranteed to be totally or overwhelmingly White while in the Americas multi-racialism continued to be "forced" upon people who might not want it, then that would make Europe seem to these American Whites to be a "promised land" and would encourage them to emigrate there - again, this would strengthen the White population of Europe.

That's a big if. Do you think this multiracialism should also be enforced on blacks and jews? Better not let them discriminate by forming all-jew or all-black organisations...

Quote:

Yes, immigration of Third World people does occasionally bring on tragedies like 9/11.

Occasionally? How much more of these could america afford? How much worse do you think the situation will be if Arabs are 10% of US population and Whites 40%?

Quote:

But immigration of even some White people in our history has brought on some other problems - the introduction of the Mafia which accompanied the Italian immgrants of the early 1900's comes to mind.

You're comparing the Italian Mafia to the 9/11 attacks?

Quote:

Overall, I just believe that immigration of people from poor countries into the US has done far more good than bad. It makes little or no difference to me where these people come from.

Do you think these same attacks would have occured if USA had a pro-white immigration policy as it did many decades ago?

Quote:

As for your comment on the "genocidal attack" that you see the European genome to be under, please read my math calculations from a few days ago in this thread.

Once Whites become minorities in the countries of the former west, who will save us from political oppression? We are already under oppression in the form of progressive taxation (disproportionately harms whites), welfare (pushes up the nonwhite breeding rate), Affirmative Action (also harms Jews and East Asians) and anti-White indoctrination from the media, education and politicians.

For what reason? Why is it "bad" to racially discriminate in a peaceful way?

What might start out as seemingly "peaceful" discrimination in a multi-racial nation might not end up that way.

Quote:

It wouldn't nescessarily encourage them to move to Europe, it might simply cause the white communities in non-european countries to slowly die out because they cannot remain separate.

I disagree. The history of the world is filled with disgruntled people who disliked the place they lived and moved somewhere else. Why should disgruntled Whites in the US, Canada and Australia be any different? You're basically saying these disgruntled Western hemisphere Whites, more so than anyone else, would just give up and accept their misery. Why would they be any different than anyone else? This would be stupid of them if there was a place (an overwhelmingly White Europe) where they could go and be much happier.

Quote:

That's a big if. Do you think this multiracialism should also be enforced on blacks and jews? Better not let them discriminate by forming all-jew or all-black organisations...

I have no problem with Italian-Americans forming Italian-American associations. I have no problem with Polish-Americans forming Polish-American associations. I have no problem with Irish-Americans forming Irish-American associations. These are perfectly legal, are deemed non-discriminatory and there are lots of them in the US (if you doubt me, do a google search). Likewise, I have no problem with Jewish-Americans forming Jewish-American associations. Blacks are a little different: Most American Blacks don't know what their exact ethnicity is (Yoruba, Bantu, etc.). That is, of course, due to the fact their ancestors were taken from Africa involuntarily and they basically lost their true ethnic identity. So, because of that exceptional circumstance, I would deem Black-American associations to be acceptible substitutes.

On a side note, the immigrants that come to the US from Africa don't think of themselves as "Black," they think of themselves as Somalis or Ethiopians or Nigerians. These people do form their own ethnic (as opposed to racial) associations. For example, here is one for Ethiopian-Americans:http://ethiopianamerican.com/
And here's some links to some Nigerian-American associations:http://www.odili.net/community.html
These, like Irish-American associations, are perfectly acceptible.

Quote:

Occasionally? How much more of these could america afford? How much worse do you think the situation will be if Arabs are 10% of US population and Whites 40%?

Several years ago I was a roomate for about half a year with two guys from Lebanon. Not all Arabs are bad people, probably the majority are decent, law-abiding people. Since many of them personally hold grudges against the US, perhaps in the case of Arabs, the US government would have to be far more thorough in screening candidates for immigration, and I believe that's been the case since 9/11. Most other Third World immigrants don't fall into that category.

Frankly, you could say the same things about other immigrant groups in the past. Were the Japanese-Americans living on the West Coast USA before WWII really a threat to US security? I don't think so. But they were relocated inland, just in case. Since there had also been tons of German immigration to the US for 120 years prior to WWII, were any of them a threat to US security? No.

Quote:

You're comparing the Italian Mafia to the 9/11 attacks?

If you looked at the chart I showed before of murder rates in the US since 1900, and noticed the large spike that occured in the 1910's and 1920's, it's not too hard to conclude that the Mafia and similar Italian-American gangsters of that era (like Al Capone) most certainly have killed far more over time than the 2,800 or so who were killed in 9/11. Their reasons were different, of course, but they were still murders.

Quote:

Do you think these same attacks would have occured if USA had a pro-white immigration policy as it did many decades ago?

Probably not. But then, we would never have gotten the Mafia in the US if we had never allowed Italians into the US. Life is filled with risks, and it is impossible and even undesirable to eliminate them all.

Quote:

Once Whites become minorities in the countries of the former west, who will save us from political oppression? We are already under oppression in the form of progressive taxation (disproportionately harms whites), welfare (pushes up the nonwhite breeding rate), Affirmative Action (also harms Jews and East Asians) and anti-White indoctrination from the media, education and politicians.

Again, please read the mathematical analysis I did earlier. Claims that the White race is in danger of extinction are exaggerated. In the overwhelmingly White Europe that I would accept, there would be no problem of "political oppression" from non-Whites, since Whites would hold all the power there.

As you can see, the top of the list reads mostly like a who's-who of largely homogeneous European nations. Frankly, I can make a really good argument that homogeneous, wealthy nations are more likely to "go socialist" and have high tax rates than anyone else.

Originally posted by Thinker
What might start out as seemingly "peaceful" discrimination in a multi-racial nation might not end up that way.

It might not, but that's what laws against physical abuse are there for.

Quote:

I disagree. The history of the world is filled with disgruntled people who disliked the place they lived and moved somewhere else. Why should disgruntled Whites in the US, Canada and Australia be any different? You're basically saying these disgruntled Western hemisphere Whites, more so than anyone else, would just give up and accept their misery. Why would they be any different than anyone else? This would be stupid of them if there was a place (an overwhelmingly White Europe) where they could go and be much happier.

Are you suggesting that the Diaspora Whites should be pressured into "returning to the homeland", like zionism?

Quote:

I have no problem with Italian-Americans forming Italian-American associations. I have no problem with Polish-Americans forming Polish-American associations. I have no problem with Irish-Americans forming Irish-American associations. These are perfectly legal, are deemed non-discriminatory and there are lots of them in the US (if you doubt me, do a google search). Likewise, I have no problem with Jewish-Americans forming Jewish-American associations. Blacks are a little different: Most American Blacks don't know what their exact ethnicity is (Yoruba, Bantu, etc.). That is, of course, due to the fact their ancestors were taken from Africa involuntarily and they basically lost their true ethnic identity. So, because of that exceptional circumstance, I would deem Black-American associations to be acceptible substitutes.

And White-American associations are evil? Why?

Some White americans were brought as slaves, and don't know their exact white ethnicity or may be white mongrels. White is a pan-european identity, what's wrong with forming associations based on that?

Quote:

On a side note, the immigrants that come to the US from Africa don't think of themselves as "Black," they think of themselves as Somalis or Ethiopians or Nigerians. These people do form their own ethnic (as opposed to racial) associations. For example, here is one for Ethiopian-Americans:http://ethiopianamerican.com/
And here's some links to some Nigerian-American associations:http://www.odili.net/community.html
These, like Irish-American associations, are perfectly acceptible.

You realise of course, there is a lot more racial diversity in the black gene pool compared to the whites.

Quote:

Several years ago I was a roomate for about half a year with two guys from Lebanon. Not all Arabs are bad people, probably the majority are decent, law-abiding people. Since many of them personally hold grudges against the US, perhaps in the case of Arabs, the US government would have to be far more thorough in screening candidates for immigration, and I believe that's been the case since 9/11. Most other Third World immigrants don't fall into that category.

Even if it is only 0.1% of the Arab or Muslim population that would commit anti-White or anti-Jew terrorism in the west, they are a very fast breeding race comparatively, and the number of potential terrorists would rise.

Quote:

If you looked at the chart I showed before of murder rates in the US since 1900, and noticed the large spike that occured in the 1910's and 1920's, it's not too hard to conclude that the Mafia and similar Italian-American gangsters of that era (like Al Capone) most certainly have killed far more over time than the 2,800 or so who were killed in 9/11. Their reasons were different, of course, but they were still murders.

I was also very interested by the large spiking that occured when the war on (some) drugs began. The race problem has obviously been inflamed by this fascist insanity.

Quote:

Again, please read the mathematical analysis I did earlier. Claims that the White race is in danger of extinction are exaggerated. In the overwhelmingly White Europe that I would accept, there would be no problem of "political oppression" from non-Whites, since Whites would hold all the power there.

That's a good idea. But would you also support "anti-discrimination" laws in a White-ruled Europe? And if not, why propose them for one region but not another..